An analysis of profile characteristics of Board of Directors (BoDs) of selected FPOs in Telangana state

Introduction

India's agricultural sector is extensive and varied, consisting of a combination of small, medium, and large-scale farmers distributed throughout the nation. Managing such a vast and fragmented sector presents considerable obstacles regarding coordination, regulation, and effective service delivery. Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs) help tackle these challenges by organizing farmers in specific regions into organized groups. As per the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO, 2014) [4] , farmers' and rural producers' organizations (POs) described as independent, non-governmental entities based in rural areas and based on membership. Following the Y.K. Alagh Committee's recommendations in 2001, the Government of India revised the Companies Act, 1956 to introduce the idea of Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs). Later, the Department of Agriculture and Cooperation issued the "Policy and Process Guidelines for Farmer Producer Organizations" (2013) to facilitate the establishment and functioning of FPOs.

In this context, FPOs are uniquely equipped to create income-generating prospects through innovative, community-based initiatives such as food processing units led by FPOs and the cultivation of agricultural inputs like seeds and saplings. These endeavours not only promote sustainable agriculture but also help balance FPOs' business operations between local consumption requirements and wider market expectations. The advancement and reinforcement of FPOs signify a strategic route towards Aatmanirbharta (self-reliance) in agriculture. By bridging the economic gap between rural and urban areas, FPOs contribute to the development of a more resilient, inclusive, and flourishing agricultural ecosystem in India (Dubey et al. 2021. FICCI, 2020) [3,5] . By the end of 2023, NABARD has facilitated to the establishment of 7,145 Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs) throughout India, with a combined membership of almost 7.26 lakh farmers. Among these, 250 FPOs were women-centric, collectively involving 91,620 women members. In the Telangana state, out of 31 districts 23 www.extensionjournal.com districts covering 59 mandals have operational NABARDsponsored FPOs (Navya and Rani, 2022) [7] . As per 2025 data, 375 FPOs have been formed under NABARD's direction, with around 1.59 lakh farmer members. Of these, 11 are women-oriented FPOs, with a total of 3,393 women members (Shiva Jyothi et al., 2025) [10] . In light with this background, the study was conducted on titled "An analysis of profile characteristics of Board of Directors (BODs) of selected FPOs in Telangana state".

Methodology

The ex-post facto research design was used to carry out the investigation. For the study, women-led FPOs and mixed FPOs supported by the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) were included. Out of total 277 NABARD active FPOs, 44 best working mixed FPOs were selected and out of 10 women led NABARD FPOs, 6 best working FPOs were selected for the study. In mixed FPOs, 60 male and 60 female boards of directors were chosen at random, for a total of 120 boards of directors; in women's FPOs, 10 female boards of directors (BoDs) were chosen from among the chosen FPOs, for a total of 60 women BoDs. Thus, 180 respondents in all were chosen for the research. The data was collected using well-structured and pre tested interview schedule.

Results

Personal variables Age

The Table 1 indicated that among men BoDs in mixed FPOs, majority (96.66%) of the respondents were in the middle age group (35-59 years) and only 1.67 per cent of the respondents each belonged to young (20-35 years) and old age (above 59 years). Among women BoDs in mixed FPOs, just above 2/3 rd (76.66%) of the respondents were in the middle age group (35-59 years), 16.67 per cent of the respondents belonged to young age group (20-35 years) and 06.67 per cent of the respondents were in old age group (above 59 years). While among women BoDs in women FPOs, majority (71.66%) of the respondents were in middle age group, 20.00 per cent of respondents belonged to young age (20-35 years) and 08.34 per cent were in old age group (above 59 years). Majority of the BoDs belonged to middle age group because most of the responsibilities of improving the farm and family was taken up by middle aged women and men BoDs who would have developed the wisdom to join in the FPOs which may benefit them in farm and other related activities. The results were in line with the Karadipatil (2021) [6] , they revealed that majority (76.36%) of directors of FPO were belonged to middle age (35 to 54).

Gender

It could be observed from the Table 2, that majority (66.66%) of the respondents were female BoDs from both mixed and women FPOs and remaining 33.33 per cent of respondents were male BoDs from mixed FPO. This result might be due to purposive selection of the respondents for the study. The respondents were taken in equal proportion from the mixed and women FPOs i.e, 60 men BoDs, 60 women BoDs from mixed FPOs and 60 women BoDs from women FPOs.

Marital status

It can be seen from the Table 3 that, cent per cent (100.00%) of the men and women from mixed FPO were married. With regard to women FPO, majority (98.33%) of the women BoDs were married and only 1.66 per cent of the respondent were widowed. According to the study, the majority of respondents had completed high school because literate individuals with a certain degree of education are more likely to express interest in joining as board of directors of FPOs than members with less education. The results were in harmony with the findings of pooja et al. (2022) [9] in which, they indicated that most (35.00%) of the respondents had medium level of education due to the reason that the formal education of the respondents is necessary to know about the impact of FPOs on yield and income and to adopt respective technologies to improve the same.

Family type

The data in the Table 5 depicted that among men BoDs in mixed FPOs, majority (95.00%) of the respondents belonged to nuclear family and remaining 05.00 per cent belonged to joint family group. In regard to women BoDs in mixed FPOs, majority (88.33%) of the women respondents belonged to nuclear families and rest (11.67%) of the percentage of respondents belonged to joint families. Among women BoDs in women FPOs, majority (85.00%) of the respondents belonged to nuclear families and remaining 15.00 per cent of respondents belonged to joint families.

The majority of respondents were nuclear families, according to the results. The cause may be that the recent trend toward a nuclear family structure brought about by changes in village family structures. Another explanation could be that, when social conventions change, younger generations favour nuclear families because they provide them more freedom to make their own decisions. A lot of people also relocate in search of better employment opportunities, which leads to nuclear family formations. The results of the study align with the findings of Singh et al.

Family size

From the Table 6 it was shown that majority (68.33%) of the men BoDs in mixed FPO belonged to medium level of family size i.e., 4-6 members, 25.00 per cent of respondents belonged to small group (up to 3 members) and remaining 06.67 per cent of respondents were in large category of family size (7-9 members). Among women BoDs in mixed FPOs, majority (56.66%) of the respondents belonged to medium family size (4-6 members) followed by small (41.66%) and large (01.68%) family size. With regards to women BoDs in women FPOs, majority (60.00%) of the respondents belonged to medium level of family size i.e., 4-6 members, 28.34 per cent of BoDs came under small (upto 3 members) category of family size and remaining 11.66 per cent belonged to large family size (7-9 members). None of the men and women BoDs in mixed and women FPOs belonged to very large size (10 above) category of family size.

The majority of respondents belonged to medium-sized families. This could be because most of the families in the area where the investigation was done were nuclear, meaning that the married couple had two or more children.

Families may choose to have smaller families as a result of growing awareness of family planning and financial limitations. www.extensionjournal.com According to the study, majority of respondents fell into the BC category. The most probable reason may be that caste will not be taken into account when applying to join the FPO or serve as board of directors. The another factor for the results may be that most of the residents of the area under investigation are members of the BC community. Therefore, the bulk of respondents in the BC group were on the BoDs in FPOs. The results of the study were in line with Amitha et al. (2021) [1] who reported that majority (42.22%) of the respondents belonged to BC category.

Social variables Occupation

From the results of Table 8, it was observed that in men BoDs of mixed FPOs, majority (73.34%) of the respondents had agriculture as their major occupation, and remaining percentage of respondents had agriculture + livestock (18.33%) and agriculture + agriculture allied business (08.33%) as their occupation. Among women BoDs in mixed FPOs, majority (76.66%) of the respondents had agriculture as their main occupation, 16.68 per cent of respondents had agriculture+ livestock as their main occupation and 06.66 percent of respondents were housewife's. In case of women BoDs in women FPOs, majority (76.66%) of the respondents had agriculture as their major occupation, 21.66 per cent of respondents had agriculture + livestock as their major occupation and remaining 1.68 per cent of respondents were housewife's. None of the women BoDs in mixed FPO and women led FPO had agriculture + agriculture allied services as their occupation.

Overall the study depicted that majority of respondents were involved in agriculture, which may be because most of them were middle-aged, lived in their own village, had ten years of experience, and still wanted to continue. The findings of the study were supported by Srinithi et al. (2021) [12] in which they found that majority (63.63%) of the farmers were doing farming alone.

Working experience (no. of yrs) in FPO

The results from the table 9 clearly indicated that with concern to men BoDs in mixed FPOs, most (41.66%) of the respondents had 5 years of experience followed by 4 years (33.34%), and 3 years (25.00%). None of the respondents had 2 years and 1 year of experience. With regards to women BoDs in mixed FPOs, most (35.00%) of the respondents had 4 years of experience in FPO followed by 5 years (33.34%), 3 years (26.66%) and 2 years (05.00%). None of the respondents had 1 year of experience in FPO. Among women BoDs in women FPOs, majority (56.67%) of the respondents had 5 years of experience in FPO followed by 3 years (25.00%), 4 years (13.33%), 1 years (03.34%) and 2 years (01.66%). www.extensionjournal.com This may be because that the majority of FPOs were established five years ago and began operating after COVID-19. As a result, most of the BoDs were retained from the beginning of the FPOs, giving FPO members more experience serving as BoDs.

The results of the study were supported with the findings of Pandey et al. (2024) [8] , they observed that most (46.90%) of the respondents had 1-5 years of membership in cooperatives, followed by < 1 year membership (40.90%), 6-10 years membership (12.20%).

Social contact

It was clear from the Table 10, that with regard to men BoDs in mixed FPOs, majority (93.33%) of the respondents had medium level of social contact and only meagre percentage (06.67%) of respondents had low social contact.

None of the respondents had high social contact. With respect to women BoDs in mixed FPOs, majority (70.00%) of the respondents belonged to medium level of social contact, 30.00 per cent of the respondents had low level of social contact and none of the respondents had high level of social contact. Among women BoDs in women FPOs, three fourth (75.00%) of the respondents had medium level of the social contact followed by high (15.00%) and low (10.00%) level.

According to the data, the majority of BoDs had a medium level of social contact, which may be due to their contacts with NGOs, government agencies, and other groups when necessary. Their interactions with local authorities, stakeholders, and FPO members may also impact their social relationships. [12] , who stated that majority of the respondents (73.48%) had medium level of extension contact. The majority of the respondents belonged to medium to semi-medium land category because, when heirs divide ancestral land across generations, the average size of individual landholdings decreases. Farmers who own medium-to-medium-sized amounts of land are more likely to participate in FPO activities because they have more access to resources and market participation.

The results of the study were supported with the findings of Baskar and Amalanathan (2022) [2] , they revealed that majority (63.40%) of the farmers belong to medium level of land holding.

Conclusion

The overall distribution of data revealed that among personal variable, majority of the BoDs belonged to middle age group in BC community, educated upto high school, married, and belonged to nuclear family with medium family size. With regard to social variables, In both FPOs, majority of the men BoDs and women BoDs had agriculture as their major occupation having 5 years of FPO working experience. The majority of the BoDs from both the FPOs belonged to medium level of social contact and extension contact. In economic variable, majority of the BoDs belonged to medium level annual income. Among men BoDs in mixed FPOs, most (48.34%) of the respondents belonged to semi medium (4.01 to 10.00 ha.) category of land holding. While women BoDs in both FPOs belonged to medium (2.01 to 4.00 ha.) category of land holding with the percentages as 53.33 and 43.34 respectively

References

1. Amitha CD, Savitha B, Sudha Rani V, Laxminarayana P. Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs) -Analysis of Profile of FPOs and Its Members in Medak District of Telangana. Curr J Appl Sci Technol. 2021;40(11):2431.
2. Baskar DA, Amalanathan J. An Economic Empowerment of the Farmers: Role of Farmer Producer Organization (FPOs). NeuroQuantology. 2022;20(9):7349-55. DOI: 10.48047/nq.2022.20.9.nq44855.
3. Dubey LR, Sharif M, Hiremath D, Meena K. Generalised Status of Farmer Producer Organisations (FPO's) In India -A Review. Int J Res Dev. 2021;6(7):298-303.
4. FAO. Contract Farming Resource Centre [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2025 May 31]. Available from: http://www.fao.org/ag/ags/contract-farming/faq/en/
5. FICCI. Empowering FPOs, Sharpening the Saw: Preparing FPOs as an effective tool towards Aatmanirabhar Bharat [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2025 May 31]. Available from: http://ficci.in/spdocument/23272/FICCI-EmpoweringFPOs-Paper.pdf
6. Karadipatil S. A study on management effectiveness of farmer producer organizations in north-eastern Karnataka [dissertation]. University of Agricultural Sciences, Raichur; 2021.
7. Navya B, Rani BJ. Status of Farmer Producer Organisation (FPO) in Telangana State. Vigyan Varta. 2022;3(7):155-8.
8. Pandey VK, Shanko A, Kaul M. Influential Factors on Women's Participation in Agricultural Cooperative in the Digital Era. EAI Endorsed Trans Scalable Inf Syst. 2024;1-11. doi: 10.4108/eetsis.4836.
9. Pooja, Pankaja HK, Krishnamurthy B. Analysis of Performance of Farmer Producer Organizations in Kalaburagi District of Karnataka. J Agric Ext Manag. 2022;23(1):149-57.
10. Shiva Jyothi Ch, Sri Latha Ch, Suhasini K, Naik VR. Unlocking potential: Examining the role of womencentric FPOS in Telangana's agricultural landscape. Int J Agric Ext Soc Dev. 2025;8(1):314-22.
11. Singh D, Singh BP, Bharti R, Pordhiya KI. A socio - economic and socio-psychological appraisal of farmer producer organisations. Pharma Innov J. 2019;8(4):6869.
12. Srinithi S, Balasubramaniam P, Palanichamy NV, Devi MN, Mohanraj V. Assessment of Profile Characteristics and Factors Determining the Membership of Farmers in Tamil Nadu Banana Producer Company (TNBPC) a Study in Trichy district of Tamil Nadu. Asian J Agric Ext Econ Sociol. 2021;39(11):278-85.